03-16-2017, 08:40 AM
Well... Nasim Mansourov also was waxing poetry around the Fujinon 16-55/2.8 which Klaus did find "However, given the very high pricing, the Fujinon XF 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR should have done better honestly speaking. If you can't live without a lens with these specs, you have no other choice."
Different sites, different results. I'm also not sure how I should rate the idea of lenscore's "one sensor to judge them all" and the optical element in between which is not onboard of any of the DSLRs using these lenses. And - they are only testing one sample (like PZ as well...) meaning there's some space to debate about tolerances and reliable production results.
However. When I see the fringing of the Nikon and the less fringing of the Sigma I start asking questions about a lens with 5 stars, high end of the rating scale. After that nothing goes above. And seeing the resolution numbers of the Otii against the Nikkor on lenscore I have to say, I would not have given so generously the highest possible verdict. I start asking questions because the reference camera is dated (but the same for the Sigma, so it is comparable)
PZ doesn't want to test the Zeiss Apo / manual focus / high end price items, I can understand that, but I notice in myself some doubts about the ratings. I feel like only a lens without any flaws deserves the highest rating.
If I wanted to replace the old Nikkor 85/1.4G I would rent both candidates and see which makes me more happy. Both have some downsides like weight and size.
Different sites, different results. I'm also not sure how I should rate the idea of lenscore's "one sensor to judge them all" and the optical element in between which is not onboard of any of the DSLRs using these lenses. And - they are only testing one sample (like PZ as well...) meaning there's some space to debate about tolerances and reliable production results.
However. When I see the fringing of the Nikon and the less fringing of the Sigma I start asking questions about a lens with 5 stars, high end of the rating scale. After that nothing goes above. And seeing the resolution numbers of the Otii against the Nikkor on lenscore I have to say, I would not have given so generously the highest possible verdict. I start asking questions because the reference camera is dated (but the same for the Sigma, so it is comparable)
PZ doesn't want to test the Zeiss Apo / manual focus / high end price items, I can understand that, but I notice in myself some doubts about the ratings. I feel like only a lens without any flaws deserves the highest rating.
If I wanted to replace the old Nikkor 85/1.4G I would rent both candidates and see which makes me more happy. Both have some downsides like weight and size.